This never occurred to me before, but Obama's tax plans are actually pretty good for the Raptors; in increasing top-earner taxes in the states, in gives Toronto a bit more of an edge and will likely edge them into one of the better tax markets for NBA players. The top earner tax bracket in the states is jumping from 35 to 39.6. By my count, that would raise the federal tax rate of every US NBA market to the point that only Dallas, Houston, Memphis, Miami, Orlando, and San Antonio will be lower, and even then only by a percentage or two.

edit: yeah, to what Puffer said, it's probably more complicated across borders. It would take someone who actually knows anything about taxes (my 2013 forms haven't been touched and April 29th now) to say how this actually applies.

This never occurred to me before, but Obama's tax plans are actually pretty good for the Raptors; in increasing top-earner taxes in the states, in gives Toronto a bit more of an edge and will likely edge them into one of the better tax markets for NBA players.

Don't know how it impacts players who play here. I guess they could say that all of their income is earned in Canada, therefore they wouldn't have to pay any US tax on their income. When I was in construction and looked into moving to another country (say construction work in Saudi or Korea) you had to divest yourself of any assets to avoid paying tax. Maybe I am remembering wrong, and maybe (I would suspect) there is special provisions for athletes.

41 games of a players salary is taxed in their 'home' team jurisdiction.

The other 41 games are taxed at the 'visiting' team jurisdiction.

Toronto taxes are definitely on the high end of the NBA but I think they are reasonably comparable to states with high tax rates such as New York and California. One might bring up value added tax (GST) but I don't think most players are buying their big ticket items in Torono so I don't see it making enough of difference. Teams in states like Texas and Florida are always going to have big advantage as long as they have no state income tax.

41 games of a players salary is taxed in their 'home' team jurisdiction.

The other 41 games are taxed at the 'visiting' team jurisdiction.

Toronto taxes are definitely on the high end of the NBA but I think they are reasonably comparable to states with high tax rates such as New York and California. One might bring up value added tax (GST) but I don't think most players are buying their big ticket items in Torono so I don't see it making enough of difference. Teams in states like Texas and Florida are always going to have big advantage as long as they have no state income tax.

Any idea what that difference is when calculated for average (5 mln) or max salary?

In the US you are looking at $200/300K difference between high tax state like NY/California versus no tax states like Texas or Florida on $5M annual salary as federal taxes remain the same remembering only 41 games are taxed in "home" state.... although then you look at those same no tax state teams playing against each other and suddenly it turns in to 43 or 45 games.

MLSE/Rogers and a new direction - The way I see it

When Rogers and Bell took over MLSE one by one they retooled and now we are in a situation where

the Leafs are in the playoffs, Toronto FC has been overhauled, Tim Leiweke has come in, and everything for once feels like it is going in the right direction. The purse strings have been opened, there is no question now that the Raptors would go well into the tax if it means winning. But I don't want to people here to judge Tim too quickly if he decides to keep Colangelo on. Think about it this way. What potential can a new GM be offered right away. We have no pick, no space, no expiring contracts worth dumping, a few tradeable assets, and the bloated carcass of a contract that Bargnani has, as well as the overpayed deals of Fields, and arguably DeRozan. It might just be in the best interest to let BC lame duck it for a year, or fire him and let Stefanski ride it out for a year because next year's GM will get

Bargnani 11 million dollar expiring deal
Amir 7 million dollar expiring deal
Fields 6.5 million dollar expiring deal
picks both 1st and 2nd rounders
Lowry's 6 million off the books or resigned...maybe
Kleiza's 4 million off the books
Aaron Gray 2.5 million off the books
Gay either off the books or 20.1 million dollars expiring

Everything was set up to allow maximum flexibility in 2014/2015

So maybe I'm wrong but unless the GM coming in wants to address things such as coaching, staff, and make a few ticky tack trades here and there, the wont really get the chance to put their stamp on it for another year.

All of this being said, the direction of MLSE has me very optimistic, even if it doesn't happen THIS summer, I know damn sure it will NEXT summer.

41 games of a players salary is taxed in their 'home' team jurisdiction.

The other 41 games are taxed at the 'visiting' team jurisdiction.

Toronto taxes are definitely on the high end of the NBA but I think they are reasonably comparable to states with high tax rates such as New York and California. One might bring up value added tax (GST) but I don't think most players are buying their big ticket items in Torono so I don't see it making enough of difference. Teams in states like Texas and Florida are always going to have big advantage as long as they have no state income tax.

But I don't want to people here to judge Tim too quickly if he decides to keep Colangelo on. Think about it this way. What potential can a new GM be offered right away. We have no pick, no space, no expiring contracts worth dumping, a few tradeable assets, and the bloated carcass of a contract that Bargnani has, as well as the overpayed deals of Fields, and arguably DeRozan. It might just be in the best interest to let BC lame duck it for a year, or fire him and let Stefanski ride it out for a year

Let me paint a picture for you: Colangelo stays on. This offseason, he "addresses our need for a backup point guard, toughness, and scoring ability off the bench" by signing Will Bynum to a 4-year, full mid-level deal with player options on year 3 and 4. Lowry starts off next year like he did this year, and BC decides to do one of his trademark "lock 'em in to a long-term extension so they don't hit the open market" moves, and extends Lowry for 3 more years at $10,$10.8,and $11.7 million.

Now he says to the press, "Our point guard situation is now taken care of for years to come. With this young, still-developing core, we believe we can grow from within to become a top-shelf eastern conference contender within 3 years."

The team, of course, wins 37 games, which turns out to be 3 games back of the final East playoff spot. We have a #14 pick, absolutely no cap room, and very few tradeable assets. Who's gonna take that job?

I say, the sooner BC's out on his ass (and preferably Stefanski with him*), the better.

* I don't know to what degree Stefanski's been responsible for our front office failures since he was hired, but he made a lot of bad decisions in Philly, and didn't exactly set the world on fire in Jersey either.

Let me paint a picture for you: Colangelo stays on. This offseason, he "addresses our need for a backup point guard, toughness, and scoring ability off the bench" by signing Will Bynum to a 4-year, full mid-level deal with player options on year 3 and 4. Lowry starts off next year like he did this year, and BC decides to do one of his trademark "lock 'em in to a long-term extension so they don't hit the open market" moves, and extends Lowry for 3 more years at $10,$10.8,and $11.7 million.

Now he says to the press, "Our point guard situation is now taken care of for years to come. With this young, still-developing core, we believe we can grow from within to become a top-shelf eastern conference contender within 3 years."

The team, of course, wins 37 games, which turns out to be 3 games back of the final East playoff spot. We have a #14 pick, absolutely no cap room, and very few tradeable assets. Who's gonna take that job?

I say, the sooner BC's out on his ass (and preferably Stefanski with him*), the better.

* I don't know to what degree Stefanski's been responsible for our front office failures since he was hired, but he made a lot of bad decisions in Philly, and didn't exactly set the world on fire in Jersey either.

Well said. I think the major concern with Colangelo acting as a "lame duck" for a season is that he will make moves in the interim that will hinder the future flexibility of the team even further. The Lowry extension is on deck. BC's already thrown around the concept of extending Gay for another few years of max pay. He scares me, quite frankly.

Yes, you could neuter BC by putting some stipulation in place where Leiweke needs to sign off on any transaction but at that point - why not just pull the trigger and fire him. I think it's important to get a fresh set of eyes in the position to evaluate the roster objectively, regardless of which direction they decide to go (continue to add pieces in an attempt to 'win now' or start to tear this thing down)

Well said. I think the major concern with Colangelo acting as a "lame duck" for a season is that he will make moves in the interim that will hinder the future flexibility of the team even further. The Lowry extension is on deck. BC's already thrown around the concept of extending Gay for another few years of max pay. He scares me, quite frankly.

Yes, you could neuter BC by putting some stipulation in place where Leiweke needs to sign off on any transaction but at that point - why not just pull the trigger and fire him. I think it's important to get a fresh set of eyes in the position to evaluate the roster objectively, regardless of which direction they decide to go (continue to add pieces in an attempt to 'win now' or start to tear this thing down)

Umm....this year BC was in a lame duck situation. And we saw how dangerous that can be. Fan of the Gay trade or not, it was a risky prospect (lucky the asking price was so low) and I still think a move entirely designed to save BC's job.

Will it be good for the team? Sure, maybe. Gay is a nice player, even if he's overpaid and a bit redundant with DeMar. We'll see what happens with the two of them and if one needs to be traded. Was it good for BC? Definitely. I think he'd already be fired if it didn't happen, and it forces the ownership group to seriously consider at least extending his option. It even makes it so that the situation for a GM would not be great going into next year, so the team may consider keeping him just so that they can conduct a search for a new guy at a better time, when they can draw better/more candidates.

He's too good at the business/politics aspect...damn SOB. We'll see what happens. Ownership has seemed different since the change, and bringing Leiweke in can't be bad. Maybe they'll have the guts to fire him now.

Umm....this year BC was in a lame duck situation. And we saw how dangerous that can be. Fan of the Gay trade or not, it was a risky prospect (lucky the asking price was so low) and I still think a move entirely designed to save BC's job.

Will it be good for the team? Sure, maybe. Gay is a nice player, even if he's overpaid and a bit redundant with DeMar. We'll see what happens with the two of them and if one needs to be traded. Was it good for BC? Definitely. I think he'd already be fired if it didn't happen, and it forces the ownership group to seriously consider at least extending his option. It even makes it so that the situation for a GM would not be great going into next year, so the team may consider keeping him just so that they can conduct a search for a new guy at a better time, when they can draw better/more candidates.

He's too good at the business/politics aspect...damn SOB. We'll see what happens. Ownership has seemed different since the change, and bringing Leiweke in can't be bad. Maybe they'll have the guts to fire him now.

I don't think Rudy is redundant with DeMar. I think DeMar is now redundant with Rudy. Rudy brings more to the table than DeMar - especially when engaged - with defense, rebounding, ability to create his own shot, and an ability to hit the three.

I don't think Rudy is redundant with DeMar. I think DeMar is now redundant with Rudy. Rudy brings more to the table than DeMar - especially when engaged - with defense, rebounding, ability to create his own shot, and an ability to hit the three.

Maybe it is just semantics on my part.

Indeed...I said a bit redundant, as in there are aspects of their games that are similar, and unfortunately they aren't all good aspects, but they aren't totally the same player.

I also see absolutely no reason to trade either one. It's not like they even play the same position. There are definitely concerns about the pairing, but it's way too early to just trade DeMar (because Gay obviously isn't getting traded this summer). See how things look next year. DeMar should have fairly good value for awhile. Can definitely afford to wait for the right deal/moment to trade him, if that's what it comes to.

Indeed...I said a bit redundant, as in there are aspects of their games that are similar, and unfortunately they aren't all good aspects, but they aren't totally the same player.

I also see absolutely no reason to trade either one. It's not like they even play the same position. There are definitely concerns about the pairing, but it's way too early to just trade DeMar (because Gay obviously isn't getting traded this summer). See how things look next year. DeMar should have fairly good value for awhile. Can definitely afford to wait for the right deal/moment to trade him, if that's what it comes to.

I'm not sure my point was clear.

Rudy brings more to the table than scoring. Therefore I would not consider him to be redundant. Because DeMar's only consistent contribution is scoring, I see him as being redundant.

In other words, if I was to pick between keeping Gay or DD, I'd keep Gay.

Rudy brings more to the table than scoring. Therefore I would not consider him to be redundant. Because DeMar's only consistent contribution is scoring, I see him as being redundant.

In other words, if I was to pick between keeping Gay or DD, I'd keep Gay.

No I got your point completely. I was just pointing out that it is just semantics on your part (again, especially since I said a "bit" redundant, not completely). Redundant doesn't mean their games are 100% the same, or that one doesn't bring more than the other. It means that certain things they bring are the same, good and bad, and that having those in excess could make it more difficult, or easier, at times for both to coexist on the floor. And I didn't feel like going into the details of their respective games, because I assumed anyone would know I'm talking about offensive aspects. In their cases, at this point, I'd lean toward more difficult. Could become easier if their shooting and guard skills get better.

If I say "X" is redundant with "Y", X is still different than Y. It means that X has a quality/function that duplicates something which Y also possesses, therefore creating an excess. That excess can be either positive, as in form a strength in excess where redundancy actually helps effectiveness, like having 4 good 3 pt shooters out there with a post-up C. It can also be a negative, like having two wings with below average handles/passing, so that defenses know they can exploit that weakness by trying to force them to dribble or pass the ball. So if X and Y are both good shooters, and X is a bad passer but Y is not, there is still redundancy, just with specific scope, and regardless of which "direction" you want to point it in. Their shooting is redundant, their passing is not. Y is clearly the better player, but it does not influence the concept of redundancy at all. X is redundant with Y, or Y is redundant with X.

So Rudy is redundant with DeMar and vice-versa, though I suppose I should apologize for not laying out the specific scope of the redundancy.

No I got your point completely. I was just pointing out that it is just semantics on your part (again, especially since I said a "bit" redundant, not completely). Redundant doesn't mean their games are 100% the same, or that one doesn't bring more than the other. It means that certain things they bring are the same, good and bad, and that having those in excess could make it more difficult, or easier, at times for both to coexist on the floor. And I didn't feel like going into the details of their respective games, because I assumed anyone would know I'm talking about offensive aspects. In their cases, at this point, I'd lean toward more difficult. Could become easier if their shooting and guard skills get better.

If I say "X" is redundant with "Y", X is still different than Y. It means that X has a quality/function that duplicates something which Y also possesses, therefore creating an excess. That excess can be either positive, as in form a strength in excess where redundancy actually helps effectiveness, like having 4 good 3 pt shooters out there with a post-up C. It can also be a negative, like having two wings with below average handles/passing, so that defenses know they can exploit that weakness by trying to force them to dribble or pass the ball. So if X and Y are both good shooters, and X is a bad passer but Y is not, there is still redundancy, just with specific scope, and regardless of which "direction" you want to point it in. Their shooting is redundant, their passing is not. Y is clearly the better player, but it does not influence the concept of redundancy at all. X is redundant with Y, or Y is redundant with X.

So Rudy is redundant with DeMar and vice-versa, though I suppose I should apologize for not laying out the specific scope of the redundancy.

I am not attempting to be antagonistic in case you think differently.

I guess I'll agree to disagree. I don't look at Gay as redundant in any which way because he is not one dimensional. I do consider DeMar redundant because his strength lies in just one area that is shared with Gay.

Hopefully both guys develop and grow their games this summer so that any talk of redundancy is a non-issue as they round out their games to become better all around players.

...Hopefully both guys develop and grow their games this summer so that any talk of redundancy is a non-issue as they round out their games to become better all around players.

I saw a lot of games in which they really seemed to compliment each other. When they are both on the floor and Gay DOES move to the corner, they really stretch the defence. When Demar drives, Gay is good at offensive rebounds and is a reasonable passer (I don't think a lot of players were expecting his passes early after his trade, especially JV who everyone on the team seemed to ignore).

I think Demar will start looking for Gay and JV next season. He really hasn't had a lot of options since the Bosh trade, when he kind of had to pick up the mantle of "number one offensive option."

I expect more from this particular pairing next season. Be interesting to see what they look like coming out of training camp.

I saw a lot of games in which they really seemed to compliment each other. When they are both on the floor and Gay DOES move to the corner, they really stretch the defence. When Demar drives, Gay is good at offensive rebounds and is a reasonable passer (I don't think a lot of players were expecting his passes early after his trade, especially JV who everyone on the team seemed to ignore).

I think Demar will start looking for Gay and JV next season. He really hasn't had a lot of options since the Bosh trade, when he kind of had to pick up the mantle of "number one offensive option."

I expect more from this particular pairing next season. Be interesting to see what they look like coming out of training camp.

And DeMar did show potential in rebounding and passing this year. Like most things though, consistency is the issue. I am not sure why he goes 25 games averaging over 4 assists per game and then end the season season averaging well under 2 over the last 16 games. It is the same with rebounding. He averaged 5 rebounds per game to start the first two months of the season but by the end he was under 3.

If both DD and Gay can hit the corner threes with consistency (anything over 33%) it is really going to help the Raptors. If Gay can get back to 39%.... well lets just turn our focus to their defense and coaching.

Hopefully both guys develop and grow their games this summer so that any talk of redundancy is a non-issue as they round out their games to become better all around players.

If you look at Derozan's numbers, the only area where he improved was that he hit slightly more 'long twos' this year than last year. That's about it. So, given his %age of assisted baskets fell, you could say he created better for himself this year. So, yeah, he showed flashes of good stuff but his impact on the game wasn't noticably different than previous years. Why can't he sustain elevated rebounding and assist numbers? Cause he isn't good enough.

Gay is in his, what, eighth year? Expecting him to improve or develop his game in any material way is like expecting Bargnani to do the same. Ain't gonna happen. I guess he could shoot the three at his career average but what you saw the last ~30 games is what you're getting.

I'm not sure if they're redundant or not but I am watching the playoffs and am not very confident with this wing pairing going forward based on what I am seeing.

If you look at Derozan's numbers, the only area where he improved was that he hit slightly more 'long twos' this year than last year. That's about it. So, given his %age of assisted baskets fell, you could say he created better for himself this year. So, yeah, he showed flashes of good stuff but his impact on the game wasn't noticably different than previous years. Why can't he sustain elevated rebounding and assist numbers? Cause he isn't good enough.

Gay is in his, what, eighth year? Expecting him to improve or develop his game in any material way is like expecting Bargnani to do the same. Ain't gonna happen. I guess he could shoot the three at his career average but what you saw the last ~30 games is what you're getting.

I'm not sure if they're redundant or not but I am watching the playoffs and am not very confident with this wing pairing going forward based on what I am seeing.

This has been my point all along re: Rudy. I just don't see the gap in production between he and Derozan to justify paying him double the salary and expecting him to be the team's centrepiece. If they're redundant, then IMO Gay needs to be the one they get rid of.

I get that Gay looks like he *should* be a keeper -- better rebounder, better defensive intuition, etc. But his production doesn't justify it, and he's no spring chicken in the league; expecting him to develop further at this point is pretty optimistic. Even if the shooting woes were an eye issue that's solved with medical attention, he still doesn't bring enough to the table, incl. 'intangibles' like leadership, etc. that would justify him being a franchise player. And whether you accept it or not, that's what Colangelo thinks of him (another reason it's great that there's another hand on the rudder now, lest BC try to extend Rudy this summer).

From my perspective, at this point, the current roster is nowhere near good enough to think that a deep playoff run is even an option in the next 3-5 years. With that perspective, I think any move made over the next year should be about changing that situation. And that means not building around the wrong (overpriced, overvalued) players.

I can accept Lowry; he's got skills that can help this team, and he's still cheap. However, he's not -- right now -- showing that he deserves an extension or to be the undisputed PG for the long term. If there isn't a significant uptick next season, he has to go. Toronto can't afford to pay him $10M/year on speculation.

I can accept Derozan; he's overpaid for current production (see: speculation, as w/Lowry), but he's not drastically overpaid league-wide, and he still has potential to be tapped. Again, though, if he doesn't show significant improvement to the point where he makes Gay redundant, he's trade bait. Not as critical to get rid of as Gay, based purely on costs, but if one has to go... let the expensive one go.

I can accept Rudy, but only if he gets all the way back to his career best production, and even then, an extension cannot jeopardize future financial flexibility for guys like Valanciunas or Ross (he may develop into something they need to pay to keep) or any other young talent Toronto can acquire through draft or trade over the next couple of seasons.

The guys who they should be looking to keep, IMO, are not the exciting options; they're the meat-and-potatoes players who can be the "build" around whatever elite talent they can get, whether that's Val or someone else. I don't think it's Gay, I don't think it would be Boozer, it's definitely not Derozan. What I mean is, they don't have that elite talent yet, and they should be looking for it in 'younger'/'potential'/'cheaper' players, given their window for success.

If I was an incoming GM, my starting point for thinking about this roster in 2013-14 would be:

1. Keep: Amir, Fields, Gray. They're relatively cheap (Fields aside; he'll be cheap for what he brings if he can return to rookie form; if not, he falls into #3.

2. Monitor progress: Demar, Ross. Add Demar to trade bait pile if he doesn't improve. Ross gets one more season to prove himself.

3. Move: Gay if/when the right deal comes along. If he's fitting in, offer in the range of $36-40M over 3 years. Any more, let him walk, he's not worth it.

4. Build: around Valanciunas. He's the only guy on the current roster that you can look at with any confidence today and say he's going to be an effective, borderline All-Star calibre starting player for many, many years.

(this post probably best belongs in some other thread. sorry)

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.